Back to Search Start Over

Fractional Flow Reserve to Guide Treatment of Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease.

Authors :
Rioufol, Gilles
Dérimay, François
Roubille, François
Perret, Thibault
Motreff, Pascal
Angoulvant, Denis
Cottin, Yves
Meunier, Ludovic
Cetran, Laura
Cayla, Guillaume
Harbaoui, Brahim
Wiedemann, Jean-Yves
Van Belle, Éric
Pouillot, Christophe
Noirclerc, Nathalie
Morelle, Jean-François
Soto, François-Xavier
Caussin, Christophe
Bertrand, Bernard
Lefèvre, Thierry
Source :
Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC). Nov2021, Vol. 78 Issue 19, p1875-1885. 11p.
Publication Year :
2021

Abstract

<bold>Background: </bold>There is limited evidence that fractional flow reserve (FFR) is effective in guiding therapeutic strategy in multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) beyond prespecified percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary graft surgery candidates.<bold>Objectives: </bold>The FUTURE (FUnctional Testing Underlying coronary REvascularization) trial aimed to evaluate whether a treatment strategy based on FFR was superior to a traditional strategy without FFR in the treatment of multivessel CAD.<bold>Methods: </bold>The FUTURE trial is a prospective, randomized, open-label superiority trial. Multivessel CAD candidates were randomly assigned (1:1) to treatment strategy based on FFR in all stenotic (≥50%) coronary arteries or to a traditional strategy without FFR. In the FFR group, revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention or surgery) was indicated for FFR ≤0.80 lesions. The primary endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events at 1 year.<bold>Results: </bold>The trial was stopped prematurely by the data safety and monitoring board after a safety analysis and 927 patients were enrolled. At 1-year follow-up, by intention to treat, there were no significant differences in major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events rates between groups (14.6% in the FFR group vs 14.4% in the control group; hazard ratio: 0.97; 95% confidence interval: 0.69-1.36; P = 0.85). The difference in all-cause mortality was nonsignificant, 3.7% in the FFR group versus 1.5% in the control group (hazard ratio: 2.34; 95% confidence interval: 0.97-5.18; P = 0.06), and this was confirmed with a 24 months' extended follow-up. FFR significantly reduced the proportion of revascularized patients, with more patients referred to exclusively medical treatment (P = 0.02).<bold>Conclusions: </bold>In patients with multivessel CAD, we did not find evidence that an FFR-guided treatment strategy reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death at 1-year follow-up. (Functional Testing Underlying Coronary Revascularisation; NCT01881555). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
07351097
Volume :
78
Issue :
19
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC)
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
153177599
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2021.08.061